Jefferson Davis' Farewell Address

Senate Chamber, U.S. Capitol, January 21, 1861

I rise, Mr. President [John C. Breckinridge],
for the purpose of announcing to the Senate that I have satisfactory
evidence that the State of Mississippi, by a solemn ordinance of her
people in convention assembled, has declared her separation from the
United States. Under these circumstances, of course my functions are
terminated here. It has seemed to me proper, however, that I should
appear in the Senate to announce that fact to my associates, and I will
say but very little more. The occasion does not invite me to go into
argument; and my physical condition would not permit me to do so if it
were otherwise; and yet it seems to become me to say something on the
part of the State I here represent, on an occasion so solemn as this.

It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for
many years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty,
the right of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not
believed there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi
was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing
necessity, I should still, under my theory of the Government, because of
my allegiance to the State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by
her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do think she has
justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her people
before that act was taken, counseled them then that if the state of
things which they apprehended should exist when the convention met, they
should take the action which they have now adopted.

I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with
the advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to
disregard its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the
law. Such is not my theory. Nullification and secession, so often
confounded, are indeed antagonistic principles. Nullification is a
remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, and against the
agent of the States. It is only to be justified when the agent has
violated his constitutional obligation, and a State, assuming to judge
for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals to
the other States of the Union for a decision; but when the States
themselves, and when the people of the States, have so acted as to
convince us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then,
and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its
practical application.

A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often
arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of
nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his
deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some
remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound
South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. [John C.] Calhoun
advocated the doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be
peaceful, to be within the limits of State power, not to disturb the
Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal
of the States for their judgment.

Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be
justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time
when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better
comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable
rights of the people of the States, will prevent any one from denying
that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it
has made to any agent whomsoever.

I therefore say I concur in the action of the people of Mississippi,
believing it to be necessary and proper, and should have been bound by
their action if my belief had been otherwise; and this brings me to the
important point which I wish on this last occasion to present to the
Senate. It is by this confounding of nullification and secession that
the name of a great man, whose ashes now mingle with his mother earth,
has been invoked to justify coercion against a seceded State. The phrase
"to execute the laws," was an expression which General Jackson applied
to the case of a State refusing to obey the laws while yet a member of
the Union. That is not the case which is now presented. The laws are to
be executed over the United States, and upon the people of the United
States. They have no relation to any foreign country. It is a perversion
of terms, at least it is a great misapprehension of the case, which
cites that expression for application to a State which has withdrawn
from the Union. You may make war on a foreign State. If it be the
purpose of gentlemen, they may make war against a State which has
withdrawn from the Union; but there are no laws of the United States to
be executed within the limits of a seceded State. A State finding
herself in the condition in which Mississippi has judged she is, in
which her safety requires that she should provide for the maintenance of
her rights out of the Union, surrenders all the benefits, (and they are
known to be many,) deprives herself of the advantages, (they are known
to be great,) severs all the ties of affection, (and they are close and
enduring,) which have bound her to the Union; and thus divesting herself
of every benefit, taking upon herself every burden, she claims to be
exempt from any power to execute the laws of the United States within
her limits.

I well remember an occasion when Massachusetts was arraigned before
the bar of the Senate, and when then the doctrine of coercion was rife
and to be applied against her because of the rescue of a fugitive slave
in Boston. My opinion then was the same that it is now. Not in a spirit
of egotism, but to show that I am not influenced in my opinion because
the case is my own, I refer to that time and that occasion as containing
the opinion which I then entertained, and on which my present conduct
is based. I then said, if Massachusetts, following her through a stated
line of conduct, chooses to take the last step which separates her from
the Union, it is her right to go, and I will neither vote one dollar nor
one man to coerce her back; but will say to her, God speed, in memory
of the kind associations which once existed between her and the other
States.

It has been a conviction of pressing necessity, it has been a belief
that we are to be deprived in the Union of the rights which our fathers
bequeathed to us, which has brought Mississippi into her present
decision. She has heard proclaimed the theory that all men are created
free and equal, and this made the basis of an attack upon her social
institutions; and the sacred Declaration of Independence
has been invoked to maintain the position of the equality of the races.
That Declaration of Independence is to be construed by the
circumstances and purposes for which it was made. The communities were
declaring their independence; the people of those communities were
asserting that no man was born--to use the language of Mr.
Jefferson--booted and spurred to ride over the rest of mankind; that men
were created equal--meaning the men of the political community; that
there was no divine right to rule; that no man inherited the right to
govern; that there were no classes by which power and place descended to
families, but that all stations were equally within the grasp of each
member of the body-politic. These were the great principles they
announced; these were the purposes for which they made their
declaration; these were the ends to which their enunciation was
directed. They have no reference to the slave; else, how happened it
that among the items of arraignment made against George III was that he
endeavored to do just what the North has been endeavoring of late to
do--to stir up insurrection among our slaves? Had the Declaration
announced that the negroes were free and equal, how was the Prince to be
arraigned for stirring up insurrection among them? And how was this to
be enumerated among the high crimes which caused the colonies to sever
their connection with the mother country? When our Constitution was
formed, the same idea was rendered more palpable, for there we find
provision made for that very class of persons as property; they were not
put upon the footing of equality with white men--not even upon that of
paupers and convicts; but, so far as representation was concerned, were
discriminated against as a lower caste, only to be represented in the
numerical proportion of three fifths.

Then, Senators, we recur to the compact which binds us together; we
recur to the principles upon which our Government was founded; and when
you deny them, and when you deny to us the right to withdraw from a
Government which thus perverted threatens to be destructive of our
rights, we but tread in the path of our fathers when we proclaim our
independence, and take the hazard. This is done not in hostility to
others, not to injure any section of the country, not even for our own
pecuniary benefit; but from the high and solemn motive of defending and
protecting the rights we inherited, and which it is our sacred duty to
transmit unshorn to our children.

I find in myself, perhaps, a type of the general feeling of my
constituents towards yours. I am sure I feel no hostility to you,
Senators from the North. I am sure there is not one of you, whatever
sharp discussion there may have been between us, to whom I cannot now
say, in the presence of my God, I wish you well; and such, I am sure, is
the feeling of the people whom I represent towards those whom you
represent. I therefore feel that I but express their desire when I say I
hope, and they hope, for peaceful relations with you, though we must
part. They may be mutually beneficial to us in the future, as they have
been in the past, if you so will it. The reverse may bring disaster on
every portion of the country; and if you will have it thus, we will
invoke the God of our fathers, who delivered them from the power of the
lion, to protect us from the ravages of the bear; and thus, putting our
trust in God and in our own firm hearts and strong arms, we will
vindicate the right as best we may.

In the course of my service here, associated at different times with a
great variety of Senators, I see now around me some with whom I have
served long; there have been points of collision; but whatever of
offense there has been to me, I leave here; I carry with me no hostile
remembrance. Whatever offense I have given which has not been redressed,
or for which satisfaction has not been demanded, I have, Senators, in
this hour of our parting, to offer you my apology for any pain which, in
heat of discussion, I have inflicted. I go hence unencumbered of the
remembrance of any injury received, and having discharged the duty of
making the only reparation in my power for any injury offered.

Mr. President, and Senators, having made the announcement which the
occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains to me to bid you a
final adieu.